Ruling May Benefit Moderates

SACRAMENTO —  At a time when California voters seem to be edging toward the middle, a federal judge appeared to give that drift toward moderation a big boost Monday.

The 1996 open primary initiative was touted by a leading sponsor, Rep. Tom Campbell (R-San Jose), as an effort to ease politics away from the edges toward the center.

In the wake of Judge David Levi’s decision, joyous backers of the open primary suggested the system they devised--and voters overwhelmingly approved--would have precisely that effect.

“What it means is we’re more likely to have better candidates winning primaries,” said Ron Smith, a Republican consultant with a long history of working for GOP moderates, including Campbell.

Smith defined better as “candidates that are more representative of the voters.”

“In the past, the most extreme candidates of both parties tended to win the primaries, so in November voters had a choice between candidates on the far left and the far right,” Smith said. “Now candidates in the primary won’t be so tempted to pander to the extremes.”

Others are not so convinced. “We’ll see, but I’m skeptical that it will have much impact,” said Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward). “The most intensely partisan and ideological people will still dominate the parties.”

At minimum, the ruling--if affirmed by appellate courts--means that independents and people who register to vote but don’t state a party preference will be able to vote in next June’s primary for candidates running for governor and U.S. senator and for the Assembly and state Senate.

The ranks of these less ideological voters has grown in recent years, amounting to 10% of the state’s electorate--and more in some areas.

Under the old rules, they were precluded from voting for candidates in primaries, and people who were affiliated with one party could not switch and vote for primary candidates from another party.

The new mix and match approach to voting allowed under the open primary system seems sure to have an impact on California politics, starting in 1998.

“It’s going to change the dynamic of primary elections and that will affect both who’s going to win and how they go about conducting their campaigns,” said Bruce Cain, acting director of the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley.

Short of that, few could agree on just what this balloting system would mean.

Some said single issue groups might now become more active. For instance, Bill Saracino, executive director of Gun Owners of California, said he may now start backing pro-gun Democrats in districts where the group would have little chance of helping a pro-gun Republican win.

Others say wealthy candidates and incumbents will be the biggest winners because they have the extra money it takes to woo cross-over voters.

The open primary case is one of three measures born of voter-approved initiatives that are pending in the federal courts. The others would impose term limits on legislators and place strict campaign financing and spending limits.

In one of many potential twists, the open primary system could run counter to the intent of Proposition 208, the measure that seeks to restrict campaign fund-raising and spending.

Some believe an open primary will cost more money, as candidates attempt to reach out to moderates from the opposite party and independents.

“I’m advising my caucus to redo their budgets to treat the primary as a general election,” said Assembly Republican Leader Bill Leonard (R-San Bernardino). “It could make the primary much more difficult to finance.

“Before, you went after your base of support in the primary,” Leonard added. “Now, you protect the base and poach in the other party. That to me is going to be the new strategy--if you can afford it.”

For all the instant analysis and speculation, however, there were some who suggested the open primary system will have little, if any, affect on state politics.

“It’s not clear to me that an open primary is going to make much of a difference at all,” said Dan Schnur, a GOP strategist and former top campaign aide to Gov. Pete Wilson.

“The voters who tend to run out to vote in the primaries tend to be the most ideologically driven. It’s the liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. It’s difficult to see how an open primary is going to convince moderates of either party that it’s suddenly worth their while to start turning out in huge numbers.”